Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Performance rating downrated after maternity leave

41 replies

Laruca · 11/03/2025 12:20

I am after some advice regarding a downrate of my performance rating. I came back after maternity leave in September. I had the performance review with my line manager in December and he told me that I would get the top rating "exceeding contribution". After a calibration exercise from the managers above him, I have been downrated to "successful contribution". I have asked him today for the reason of this and he mentioned that it is because I have been off for 8 months of the year. Can they do this or is it maternity discrimination?

OP posts:
Msmoonpie · 12/03/2025 10:51

I would also contact pregnant and screwed.

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 11:28

Laruca · 12/03/2025 10:42

I have had the meeting with my line manager's line manager and he has said the same. They had to choose someone to downgrade and my name came up because I had been off 8 months of the year

So - unlike most everyone else I don't think it is (yet) cut and dried, because your issue now will be proving it. Or at least one issue is proving it.

Your position would be stronger if you knew (a) whether anyone else who had not had a full 12 months in work (for any reason) was also downgraded, and (b) what reasons other people downgraded were given. Of course the problem here is that you aren't entitled to that information.If the pool of people were bigger, then you could require the information in an anonymised form - but given the small numbers I doubt if anonymising the information would work.

Your second problem is the one that I raised earlier - how far are you willing to take this, and what are the consequences? There is no magic employment fairy who solves your problems for you. I know you know that, although I do sometimes despair of people who obviously think there is. If you wish to challenge this your first action must be to immediately raise a grievance and see it through to the bitter end. The employer might re-think if you do that - but if they do it doesn't mean they will like it, nor that they can't do anything about not liking it. You may find that any promotion you have your eye on never works out. Again, not saying they would take it out on you or hold a grudge forever - but only you know how your employer is likely to react.

Once you have exhausted (and lost) the whole grievance procedure including the appeal, then you can lodge an employment tribunal claim for discrimination. You need to keep an eye on the clock - you only have three months less a day from the date of the action you are complaining about, so if the grievance is delayed you may have to claim before it is completed.

There are massive delays in tribunals now, and discrimination are more complex cases, so you may be looking at anything between 12 and 24 months before your case comes up, whilst having to work with your employer.

Or you can resign NOW and claim constructive dismissal and discrimination which I won't go into detail about right now because I would never advise anyone to go down this route unless they are deperate (and possibly foolish) - the chance of winning are almost nil.

In either of these cases you may end up with a settlement. Although it is likely that not having a job would be part of any deal - again that may not be the case, but it more often than not is.

The better part of valour is to suck it up - again I am not recommending that you do, simply outlining your options. In terms of risk to your employment, this carries the least risk. Worst case scenario is that you get less bonus this year - and again, whilst I am not convinced entirely by the argument, you might choose to see this as a reasonably "fair" outcome overall if others have had to work the full 12 months to get the same level of bonus. Best case scenario is that you don't get as much bonus but your acceptance marks you as a "team player" and increases your stock with the employer, which long term might be a good thing - again, not saying it will be the case, just that it's a possible option.

I think that covers most potential scenarios. I wouldn't recommend any one over another because that isn't my decision to take. There are potentially benefits or disbenefits to all the options, so whatever you chose has to be what you are willing to live with and based on how you think your employer would respond.

Laruca · 12/03/2025 11:50

I tried to put across the unfairness of the reason; to be honest, I am not sure if they get it. I work in a very male dominated industry and I have always thought that I have never been disadvantaged or treated differently for being a woman, but in this case, I think I have been penalised. I could escalate it to HR (it is a big company with a big HR department) and I am surprised that these things are not run past HR, but I am going to leave it here as I want to continue working in this company for many more years and I don't want to create a problem

OP posts:
AnSolas · 12/03/2025 12:19

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 11:28

So - unlike most everyone else I don't think it is (yet) cut and dried, because your issue now will be proving it. Or at least one issue is proving it.

Your position would be stronger if you knew (a) whether anyone else who had not had a full 12 months in work (for any reason) was also downgraded, and (b) what reasons other people downgraded were given. Of course the problem here is that you aren't entitled to that information.If the pool of people were bigger, then you could require the information in an anonymised form - but given the small numbers I doubt if anonymising the information would work.

Your second problem is the one that I raised earlier - how far are you willing to take this, and what are the consequences? There is no magic employment fairy who solves your problems for you. I know you know that, although I do sometimes despair of people who obviously think there is. If you wish to challenge this your first action must be to immediately raise a grievance and see it through to the bitter end. The employer might re-think if you do that - but if they do it doesn't mean they will like it, nor that they can't do anything about not liking it. You may find that any promotion you have your eye on never works out. Again, not saying they would take it out on you or hold a grudge forever - but only you know how your employer is likely to react.

Once you have exhausted (and lost) the whole grievance procedure including the appeal, then you can lodge an employment tribunal claim for discrimination. You need to keep an eye on the clock - you only have three months less a day from the date of the action you are complaining about, so if the grievance is delayed you may have to claim before it is completed.

There are massive delays in tribunals now, and discrimination are more complex cases, so you may be looking at anything between 12 and 24 months before your case comes up, whilst having to work with your employer.

Or you can resign NOW and claim constructive dismissal and discrimination which I won't go into detail about right now because I would never advise anyone to go down this route unless they are deperate (and possibly foolish) - the chance of winning are almost nil.

In either of these cases you may end up with a settlement. Although it is likely that not having a job would be part of any deal - again that may not be the case, but it more often than not is.

The better part of valour is to suck it up - again I am not recommending that you do, simply outlining your options. In terms of risk to your employment, this carries the least risk. Worst case scenario is that you get less bonus this year - and again, whilst I am not convinced entirely by the argument, you might choose to see this as a reasonably "fair" outcome overall if others have had to work the full 12 months to get the same level of bonus. Best case scenario is that you don't get as much bonus but your acceptance marks you as a "team player" and increases your stock with the employer, which long term might be a good thing - again, not saying it will be the case, just that it's a possible option.

I think that covers most potential scenarios. I wouldn't recommend any one over another because that isn't my decision to take. There are potentially benefits or disbenefits to all the options, so whatever you chose has to be what you are willing to live with and based on how you think your employer would respond.

Can you provide more detail on the 12 months?

The OP was graded on work done and then a weighting was applied which is covered under specific legislation?

Her 8 months was protected leave and should not be used to downgrade her in any calculation.

Her grading for the 4 months was unfairly weighted against 12 month. The other employees had an obligation to meet the targets over 12 months she did not.
This grading will roll through her employment record and could be used to justify her being made redundant where a male will never face that risk.
My understanding was that due to the power inbalance the employer needed to be proactive to prove that it was not discrimination.

I do agree that the employer may decide to fight the grading but her manager and a senior manager has already stated the downgrade was due to her taking pregnacy leave per their HR policy/legal obligation.

@Laruca EmmaMaria made a great point and I would strongly recomend that before you go to HR you get confirmation in writing from both managers that the downgrade was as a direct result of your leave. So an as per our meeting email would be in order. List what was discussed and that your grading (or part of it) was calculated on a 4/12 weighting not a 4/4 weighting.
That way its hard for HR to roll back on written proof.

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 12:58

@AnSolas Can you provide more detail on the 12 months?
The OP was graded on work done and then a weighting was applied which is covered under specific legislation?

I thought I had been fairly clear throughout. The OP was told that her grading was based on the fact that she was not physically in work over the 12 month period. If others have been subject to the same downgrading for not being physically present in work but for other reasons (sickness, or not being in the role for the full 12 months) then it muddies the water. I have been clear that that does not mean that there isn't a case - simply that (a) it is not nessessarily a straightforward case and (b) what is legally fair and what is fair in the real world are often miles apart, and that the OP needs to make that decision as to where she stands on that matter.

I have laid out the range of options as I see them, giving no weighting to any of them. That included taking legal action for discrimination. The OP needs to weigh up those options and make her decisions accordingly - we have only a snapshot of the facts here, and no knowledge at all of the employer and their likely approach.It appears that she has made her choice, but obviously if she wants to pursue legal action then she must start with the grievance, and getting proper legal advice would be a good idea.

I do not disagree with any of your points, and I don't see that you disagree with any of mine. The possibility of the grading having a longer term outcome may be a valid point that I did not cite; but grievances /legal action against your employer also "rolls through the record into the future" and can also follow you into future potential jobs.

There is no "right" answer to be had here.

Brefugee · 12/03/2025 13:04

Laruca · 12/03/2025 11:50

I tried to put across the unfairness of the reason; to be honest, I am not sure if they get it. I work in a very male dominated industry and I have always thought that I have never been disadvantaged or treated differently for being a woman, but in this case, I think I have been penalised. I could escalate it to HR (it is a big company with a big HR department) and I am surprised that these things are not run past HR, but I am going to leave it here as I want to continue working in this company for many more years and I don't want to create a problem

Good pragmatic approach. I was downgraded once (after always being in the top evaluation grade, for over 10 years) because of quotas once.

I made them put it on record that my grading was indeed S (top) and not A, and that it had been dowgraded by lottery due to quotas. I then printed everything and kept it. So that when i got a top grade again the next year, and was again threatened with downgrade due to quota, i could say "nope, not 2 years in a row". But. It made things very difficult for months and months.

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 13:14

@Laruca I would suggest that you give yourself a few days to mull it over - you have nothing to lose by doing so, and that will give you time to play out the possibilities. However, I do respect what you are saying. It may or may not help, but I did allude to having been in a similar position, so if it helps in any way...

I was a very senior manager, got a new manager (who was notorious for bullying and getting her own way) who decided (and actually said) that I should retire because I was disabled. In a nutshell, the actual issue was that she couldn't bully me, I didn't keep my mouth shut and had opinions that weren't hers (and was usually correct!), but her choice was to try to push me into leaving "because it must be hard working with a severe disability". This went on for several months. Unfortunately for her I had two things in my favour - a good union and recordings of her! When she couldn't push me out voluntarily she went for a sham redundancy.

However I knew that if I fought back I was "finished" - bitch though she was, nobody ever fought back because the director adored her. But for me it was easier to make the decision - I had a great union, I was close to retirement anyway, and I wanted no promotion or "good intentions" from the employer. "Frankly, my dear, I didn't give a damn" so to speak. Did I win - yes. Did I keep my job - no - I was give a choice of other jobs to go away until I retired, and took one of those. That was the outcome I expected, and because I had no desire to see the employer as long term, it suited me to prove she could be beaten. But if I am honest, had it been earlier in my career, I would probably have gone long before that because I had a good professional reputation, her intent was clear, and I knew for an absolute fact that the director would always have her back (don't even go to wondering how her and the director ended up "coincidentally" on the same plane to the same island that almsot nobody goes on holiday to!).

prh47bridge · 12/03/2025 13:35

Laruca · 12/03/2025 11:50

I tried to put across the unfairness of the reason; to be honest, I am not sure if they get it. I work in a very male dominated industry and I have always thought that I have never been disadvantaged or treated differently for being a woman, but in this case, I think I have been penalised. I could escalate it to HR (it is a big company with a big HR department) and I am surprised that these things are not run past HR, but I am going to leave it here as I want to continue working in this company for many more years and I don't want to create a problem

It isn't just unfair. It is unlawful. I understand you don't want to pursue this. Unfortunately, if you don't take it further other women may have the same problem. These managers need to understand the law.

Floofyboy2010 · 12/03/2025 13:52

prh47bridge · 12/03/2025 13:35

It isn't just unfair. It is unlawful. I understand you don't want to pursue this. Unfortunately, if you don't take it further other women may have the same problem. These managers need to understand the law.

Exactly this, but OP has to be mindful of the personal cost of pursuing it - as I well know, both professionally and personally. It isn't easy being the hero.

prh47bridge · 12/03/2025 14:01

Floofyboy2010 · 12/03/2025 13:52

Exactly this, but OP has to be mindful of the personal cost of pursuing it - as I well know, both professionally and personally. It isn't easy being the hero.

Agreed and fully understand if OP doesn't want to be the one to push it.

AnSolas · 12/03/2025 14:02

EmmaMaria
If others have been subject to the same downgrading for not being physically present in work but for other reasons (sickness, or not being in the role for the full 12 months) then it muddies the water.

My point was that it is imo unlawful to downgrade her score as the job had to lawfully "exclude" her from the workforce for 8 of the 12 months.
So its the same as her employer choosing to downgrading employees who took their lawfull 20 day holiday quota.

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 14:50

AnSolas · 12/03/2025 14:02

EmmaMaria
If others have been subject to the same downgrading for not being physically present in work but for other reasons (sickness, or not being in the role for the full 12 months) then it muddies the water.

My point was that it is imo unlawful to downgrade her score as the job had to lawfully "exclude" her from the workforce for 8 of the 12 months.
So its the same as her employer choosing to downgrading employees who took their lawfull 20 day holiday quota.

Yes - but as you will be aware, there are 120 opinions for every 75 lawyers, which is why there are courts. Who don't always get it "right" (whatever that means) anyway. What might be an opinion here - mine, yours, anyone's - based on a very truncated one side of something is guidance at best. I have seen too many people go to tribunal simply because they are certain they have a fantastic case - and lose. And some of those cases, I would have agreed were strong.

AnSolas · 12/03/2025 15:17

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 14:50

Yes - but as you will be aware, there are 120 opinions for every 75 lawyers, which is why there are courts. Who don't always get it "right" (whatever that means) anyway. What might be an opinion here - mine, yours, anyone's - based on a very truncated one side of something is guidance at best. I have seen too many people go to tribunal simply because they are certain they have a fantastic case - and lose. And some of those cases, I would have agreed were strong.

True🤷‍♀️
And the OP has nothing in writing at the moment either.

jellyfishperiwinkle · 12/03/2025 15:23

I wouldn't take it to tribunal, I'd take it to my employer and say they are being discriminatory and demand that they amend my review to what it should be. But that's me, not everyone wants to rock the boat. But I didn't get to a senior position and in a fantastic job that I love by staying still in the boat.

Mimu2 · 12/03/2025 17:46

Consider this a red flag in the bigger picture of your employment at this company. Your line manager, the line manager above, HR, everyone involved decided that this was reasonable to do to you. I experienced the same. It was the first time I noticed this kind of discrimination, but it was not the last. Don't waste your time and energy with a company that thinks this is ok. It's likely the tip of the iceberg.

prh47bridge · 12/03/2025 18:49

EmmaMaria · 12/03/2025 14:50

Yes - but as you will be aware, there are 120 opinions for every 75 lawyers, which is why there are courts. Who don't always get it "right" (whatever that means) anyway. What might be an opinion here - mine, yours, anyone's - based on a very truncated one side of something is guidance at best. I have seen too many people go to tribunal simply because they are certain they have a fantastic case - and lose. And some of those cases, I would have agreed were strong.

You won't get lots of different opinions from lawyers on this case. There is plenty of case law. If an employee's performance is rated, it must be based on the time they were at work. They cannot down rate your performance because you were on maternity leave for some of the period in question. If OP had clear evidence that this is what has happened, it would be a straightforward win at tribunal if she wanted to go there.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread